&w=3840&q=100)
History Today: When London was rocked by its worst terror attack since World War II
On July 7, 2005, London faced its worst attack since World War II when bombs went off at three Underground stations and on a double-decker bus.
The suicide bombings killed 56 people, including the bombers, and around 700 others were injured.
Also on this day in 1981, US President Ronald Reagan announced he was putting forward Arizona Judge Sandra Day O'Connor's name to become the first female justice to serve on the US Supreme Court.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
As part of Firstpost Explainers' History Today series, here's a look at what happened on July 7:
2005 London bombings
On the morning of July 7, 2005, London was hit by a series of explosions during rush hour. Bombs went off in three busy Underground trains and on a city bus.
The suicide attacks, believed at the time to be linked to al-Qaeda, killed 56 people, including the bombers, and left about 700 injured.
This was the deadliest attack on Britain since World War II. No alert was issued before the blasts.
The train bombs went off on the London Underground around 8:50 am, in three different locations.
The London Underground train which was involved in an explosion at Aldgate Underground station. Reuters/File Photo
About an hour later, a double-decker bus near Tavistock Square on Upper Woburn Place was also targeted. The blast tore the roof off the bus.
The bombings took place while world leaders, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, were gathered at the G8 summit in Scotland.
Speaking shortly after the news broke, Blair described the attacks as barbaric and said the timing, during the summit, was likely deliberate.
Of the four bombers, three were born in Britain and one in Jamaica. On September 1, 2005, al-Qaeda officially claimed responsibility in a video aired on the Al-Jazeera network.
Just two weeks later, on July 21, another four men tried to carry out a second set of attacks on the city's transport system. But these bombs did not go off as planned. The suspects were arrested by the end of the month.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Sandra Day nominated to US Supreme Court
On this day in 1981, US President Ronald Reagan declared that he would nominate Arizona Judge Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court, making her the first woman ever to be chosen for the role.
During his 1980 campaign, Reagan had vowed to nominate a woman to the top court as soon as the chance arose. He picked O'Connor from a list of around two dozen male and female candidates as his first Supreme Court nominee.
The US Senate later unanimously approved her appointment on September 21. She was sworn in by Chief Justice Warren Burger on September 25.
US President Reagan presents his Supreme Court nominee Sandra Day O'Connor in the Rose Garden of the White House. AP/File Photo
Sandra Day earned her law degree in just two years and graduated near the top of her class. She went on to marry John Jay O'Connor III, a fellow student.
Despite her academic success, she faced rejection from law firms because she was a woman. She then entered public service and got a job as deputy county attorney in San Mateo, California.
In 1953, her husband was drafted into the US Army and posted to West Germany as a military judge. Sandra worked there as a civilian lawyer for the army.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
She became Arizona's assistant attorney general in 1965 and was appointed to a vacant seat in the state senate in 1969.
After winning elections, she became the first woman in the country to serve as majority leader of a state senate.
This Day, That Year
1797: For the first time in US history, the House of Representatives used its power to impeach and voted to charge Senator William Blount of Tennessee.
1898: The United States annexed Hawaii, which later became a territory in 1900 and a state in 1959.
1981: Former India captain and legendary wicketkeeper-batter Mahendra Singh Dhoni was born.
2013: Andy Murray ended a 77-year wait for a British men's singles champion at Wimbledon by beating Novak Djokovic in the final.
2021: Haitian President Jovenel Moise was assassinated, and his wife was injured in a late-night attack at their home.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
District administration to propose renaming Dakshina Kannada as Mangaluru
Meanwhile, Dayanand Kathalsar of Mangaluru District Tulu Movement Committee and former chairman of Karnataka Tulu Sahitya Academy at a press briefing demanded the government to rename DK as Mangaluru district. He said that even in the Sangam literature, there is a mention of 'Tulunadu' and during Vijayanagara empire, Tulunadu was divided into 'Mangaluru Rajya' and 'Barkur Rajya'. "Though we are freed from the rule of the Portuguese and the British, names like 'South Canara' or the Dakshina Kannada given during their period are still used, which need to be changed," he said. KPCC general secretary Rakshit Shivaram said that when SM Krishna was the chief minister, he came up with the Brand Bengaluru concept similarly it is a time for 'Brand Mangaluru'. "We will soon meet the chief minister, DCM, the home minister and the district incharge minister and all the elected representatives and submit a memorandum. The present name is 'Dakshina Kannada' but we are not in the southern part of the state, instead we are in the Western part of the state. The highways, airport, port and the railway stations here are named after Mangaluru hence the district should also get the same name," he said.


The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
The ECI does not have unfettered powers
The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar, which will be facing Assembly elections in November. Political parties in the Opposition have alleged that the SIR is aimed at disenfranchising thousands of voters in Bihar by disqualifying them on the ground that they are not citizens of India. The ECI has denied this allegation and justified the revision. In the meantime, many petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the ECI's order. While the controversy centres on the motive behind this exercise being conducted just a couple of months before elections, especially when electoral rolls were revised in 2024, this article focuses on the legality of this exercise and the powers of the ECI to undertake it. Reasons for disqualification Article 326 of the Constitution declares that elections to the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies shall be held on the basis of adult suffrage. This means every adult person is entitled to be a voter provided they are not disqualified on certain specified grounds. There are two essential qualifications of being an elector under this Article: the person should be citizen of India and should be aged not less than 18. The Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1950, lays down disqualifications for registration as an elector. These are namely unsoundness of mind as declared by a competent court, and disqualification from voting as provided in Section 11A of the 1951 RPA. Conditions for registration as a voter are laid down in Section 19 of the RPA: the person should not be less than 18 years of age and they should be ordinarily resident in a constituency. The term 'ordinarily resident' is explained in Section 20, which says a person shall not be deemed to be ordinarily resident merely because they own or possess a dwelling house in that constituency. Also, a person does not cease to be ordinarily resident if they absent themselves temporarily from their ordinary place of residence. The ECI enjoys enormous powers in respect of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections to Parliament, the State Legislatures, and to the offices of the President and Vice President. Article 324 of the Constitution, which empowers the ECI to undertake these tasks, is characterised by the Supreme Court as a 'reservoir of power'. Since the conduct of free and fair elections is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution, the ECI needs to be vested with all the necessary powers to complete its task. Nevertheless, it is inconceivable that the Constitution should confer on any authority unfettered powers. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the ECI can exercise all powers in its discretion in areas which are not covered by any statute but shall act in accordance with the law wherever it exists. In Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978), the Court stated the law as follows: 'Firstly when Parliament or any State Legislature has made valid law relating to or in connection with elections, the Commission shall act in conformity with, not in violation of, such provisions but where such law is silent, Article 324 is a reservoir of power to act for the avowed purpose of pushing forward a free and fair election with expedition.' The qualifying date Let us look at the relevant provisions of the the RPA to get a perspective on the powers of the ECI in regard to revision of the electoral rolls. Section 21 of the 1950 RPA deals with the preparation and revision of electoral rolls. It speaks of four stages of revisions: (1) before elections to the Lok Sabha or Assembly; (2) before each by-election; (3) on the direction of the ECI in any year; and (4) a special revision for a constituency or part of a constituency with the ECI recording reasons for doing so. All revisions except (4) are done with reference to a qualifying date, which, under Section 14, is the first day of January. The only exception is (4): no qualifying date is mentioned because it can be done any time. The ECI order of June 24 mentions the qualifying date as 01/07/2025 and is a direction under Section 21(2)(b) of the RPA. It can be assumed that the revision being done in Bihar is under the same Section. But under this provision, the qualifying date should be 01/01/2025. The revision then should have been done from January 1, 2025. The qualifying date mentioned in the ECI order has no sanction under the law. Similarly, the term 'special intensive revision' is not found in the law. The only case where a special revision can be ordered by the ECI at any time is in relation to a constituency or a part of it and not in relation to an entire State. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the SIR in Bihar is not in conformity with the provisions of the RPA. The ECI has claimed in its order that it has power under Section 21 to undertake the exercise. True, but that power is limited to a constituency or part of it under Section 21(3) of the Act. While enjoying enormous powers under Article 324, the ECI is responsible to the rule of law and should be amenable to the norms of natural justice as per the Supreme Court. Electoral registration officers cannot summarily reject applications on the ground that foolproof documents are not being furnished to prove citizenship. Rule 8 of the Registration of Electors Rules clearly state that information shall be furnished 'to the best of ability' of the citizens. The ECI cannot ignore this statutory stipulation.


India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Trump's Tariff Bombshell: Who's Hit, What's At Stake And How Nations Are Reacting
Washington: U.S. President Donald Trump announced on July 7 a firm deadline. August 1 marks the end of the tariff pause he first introduced in April. Fourteen nations received letters warning of new American import taxes if they fail to strike deals by then. White House officials confirmed to Al-Jazeera that tariffs announced on April 2 were suspended on April 9 for 90 days. They now resume August 1 under an executive order signed by Trump. The countries facing these renewed duties include Japan and South Korea at 25 percent each, South Africa at 30 percent, Laos and Myanmar at 40 percent and others with rates ranging from 25 percent to 40 percent. Some rates, according to Reuters, like those for Kazakhstan and Bangladesh are lower than what was originally planned, while Malaysia and Japan saw slight increases. Trump posted the full letters on Truth Social. He raised concerns about trade imbalances and offered exemptions for companies that shift production to the United States. He warned that any retaliatory tariffs by those nations could trigger even steeper U.S. rates. He also emphasised flexibility, promising to adjust rates 'upward or downward' depending on each country's relationship with America. The United States also issued a separate warning to BRICS nations, threatening an additional 10 percent tariff on countries aligning with anti‑American positions during the group's summit in Brazil. Some partners have reacted. Japan's Trade Minister said Tokyo will negotiate, especially on automobiles, but will protect its agricultural interests, according to Reuters. South Korea, as reported by announced steps to address the trade shortfall with America. South Africa expressed strong objections, calling the 30 percent tariff unjustified and promising to pursue more diplomatic resolutions. Markets responded with mixed signals on Monday. U.S. equities dipped slightly – Dow down nearly 1 percent, S&P 500 off by 0.8 percent and Nasdaq down 0.9 percent. Asian markets remained relatively stable. The Indian rupee strengthened slightly after India was excluded from the tariff list, while other Asian currencies held steady, Reuters reported. Two interim trade deals have already materialised. In May, a U.S.-U.K. agreement fixed a 10 percent tariff on initial U.K. vehicle exports, rising later to 25 percent. Then in early July, the United States reached terms with Vietnam, setting a minimum 20 percent U.S. tariff and a 40 percent charge on rerouted goods, Al-Jazeera reported. The looming deadline carries high stakes. Trump called it 'firm' but allowed for negotiation if leaders reach out with new proposals, according to Politico. Experts warn the strategy reflects his aggressive blend of negotiation through pressure and brinkmanship. Some commentators refer to this approach as the 'TACO' trade – Trump Always Chickens Out – highlighting his pattern of issuing threats and then delaying. Key dates to watch: July 9 was the original deadline, now superseded. July 14 ends the EU's suspension of retaliatory tariffs. August 1 is the new trigger date for U.S. measures. Negotiators in Washington suggest possible deals with India and the European Union could still emerge before that. But partners remain cautious. Stock markets jitter at any sign of prolonged trade tension.